<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: All Your Base Are Belong to Jason Calacanis?</title>
	<link>http://www.webword.com/wp/2006/07/28/all-your-base-are-belong-to-jason-calacanis/</link>
	<description>The usability blog of John S. Rhodes</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:26:29 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Thomas Baekdal</title>
		<link>http://www.webword.com/wp/2006/07/28/all-your-base-are-belong-to-jason-calacanis/#comment-20572</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2006 22:15:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.webword.com/wp/2006/07/28/all-your-base-are-belong-to-jason-calacanis/#comment-20572</guid>
					<description>Legally, you hold the copyright, regardless of where it is published (at least to my knowledge). So this comment is essentially mine. 

The difference is perhaps not really the copyright, but usage rights. As far as I know the author will always hold the copyright, but not necessarily the usage rights. 

This is of course where things get difficult. 

Take YouTube. When you upload your video to YouTube, you agree that they can use it for whatever they want. You are still the copyright holder, but you no longer have the rights to decide how it can be used. 

The same goes on this site. This comment is my copyright, but by providing it here I essentially release it into the public domain. Thus I cannot control what people do with it.

I think a much bigger problems is RSS feeds. When you publish you site as an RSS feed, every single item in it is copyright protected. This means that any site that republishes your RSS feed as content on their sites is a copyright violation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Legally, you hold the copyright, regardless of where it is published (at least to my knowledge). So this comment is essentially mine. </p>
<p>The difference is perhaps not really the copyright, but usage rights. As far as I know the author will always hold the copyright, but not necessarily the usage rights. </p>
<p>This is of course where things get difficult. </p>
<p>Take YouTube. When you upload your video to YouTube, you agree that they can use it for whatever they want. You are still the copyright holder, but you no longer have the rights to decide how it can be used. </p>
<p>The same goes on this site. This comment is my copyright, but by providing it here I essentially release it into the public domain. Thus I cannot control what people do with it.</p>
<p>I think a much bigger problems is RSS feeds. When you publish you site as an RSS feed, every single item in it is copyright protected. This means that any site that republishes your RSS feed as content on their sites is a copyright violation.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
